If Biofouling Management Matters to You, Here’s What the Industry Is Actually Focused On  

From Research to the Real World

This spring, I attended a series of events focused on maritime decarbonization and biofouling management. These conversations were practical and rooted in the realities of ship operations. People across the industry are responding to overlapping pressures, from tighter regulations to fuel efficiency targets and sustainability commitments. One topic that consistently drew attention was the role of biofouling. It affects not just vessel performance but compliance, access to ports, and commercial viability.

Tighter Compliance Is Reshaping Operations 

Several regions have been increasing their enforcement around biofouling and have done so for a while. Ports in New Zealand, Australia, and California are actively inspecting ships and will restrict entry if hulls are not compliant with local requirements. 

In New Zealand, the Craft Risk Management Standard (CRMS) for biofouling came into effect in May 2018. It requires vessels to arrive with a clean hull or with documented evidence of biofouling management. California introduced its biofouling management regulations in October 2017, mandating biofouling management plans and detailed recordkeeping. Australia began enforcing its national biofouling requirements in December 2023, following an 18-month education phase. 

At the international level, momentum is building as we speak. The International Maritime Organization’s MEPC 83 session reaffirmed support for enhanced global biofouling management measures. While not yet mandatory, the groundwork is being laid for a globally harmonized approach to biofouling regulation. 

These developments are driving a shift in how operators approach hull maintenance. Compliance will no longer be limited to annual inspections or drydock intervals. It will involve continuous awareness of hull condition and documentation of how fouling is being managed between ports and over time. 

The link between biofouling and emissions compliance is also becoming clearer. A fouled hull increases drag, which directly raises fuel consumption. That has consequences for CII ratings and EEXI compliance. Delaying hull maintenance can push vessels out of acceptable carbon intensity ranges. 

The Industry Is Investing in Prevention

Across the events I attended, there was strong interest in new technologies that help keep hulls clean without relying on legacy antifouling coatings. Many operators are now evaluating (and some are actively applying) silicone-based fouling-release coatings. These novel coatings are part of a broader shift toward solutions that align with environmental requirements without compromising operational performance. 

Ultrasonic systems were also featured as a preventive measure. These use sound waves to interfere with biofilm formation in its early stages. The goal is to keep surfaces clean without frequent manual cleaning or reliance on harsh chemicals. Reducing biofilm at the source also helps limit the spread of invasive species and improves fuel efficiency by lowering resistance. 

There is also ongoing research into nano-textured surfaces inspired by nature (biomimicry), which passively discourage organism attachment. These technologies are not conceptual. Several are already in use on commercial vessels, and ship owners are beginning to gather data on their performance under real operating conditions. 

In-Water Grooming Is Gaining Ground

One method that stood out conversations this spring is in-water hull grooming. Unlike traditional cleaning, which happens only after fouling becomes visible, grooming is done on a schedule before fouling accumulates. It keeps the surface smooth, maintains coating performance, and avoids the need for aggressive cleaning techniques. 

Robotic grooming systems are now being deployed in several regions. These systems can operate autonomously in port, identify early-stage fouling, and remove it with minimal impact to coatings. They also reduce the risk of discharging debris into the water, which is a growing regulatory concern in invasive species-sensitive areas. 

In-water grooming supports a shift toward condition-based maintenance. Instead of waiting for scheduled drydocking or visible fouling (methods that are still prevalent across the industry), operators can act earlier, based on real-time performance data. This reduces the frequency of drydock intervals and avoids sudden performance degradation between maintenance events. 

Technology Is Closing the Gap

The events I attended made it clear that AI and automation are starting to play a larger role in hull maintenance. These systems offer real-time feedback on hull condition and help optimize cleaning frequency. 

This kind of data-driven approach allows operators to move away from fixed calendar-based maintenance. Instead, decisions can be based on actual fouling rates, vessel performance, and regional operating conditions. It also creates a clearer link between hull management and regulatory reporting, including emissions calculations and CII performance. 

Biofouling Is Now a Decarbonization Issue

The connection between hull fouling and decarbonization efforts is no longer abstract. It is well-documented and widely acknowledged across the industry. Biofouling increases resistance, which leads to higher power demand and more emissions. That impacts CII ratings, drives up fuel costs, and places operators at risk of breaching emission caps under schemes like the EU ETS. 

The Fourth IMO GHG Study highlighted the drag penalty from fouling and its direct correlation to emissions. Even low levels of slime can cause a measurable increase in fuel use. Managing that performance risk is now part of the broader strategy to meet long-term decarbonization targets. 

Looking Ahead

If I could change one thing about how the industry approaches biofouling and corrosion control today, it would be to shift from reactive to proactive, data-driven maintenance. 

Currently, many ship owners and operators still rely on reactive methods. They wait for visible signs of fouling or corrosion before acting, usually through cleaning or drydocking. This creates inefficiencies, increases operating costs, and can result in service disruptions. It also makes compliance with carbon intensity and invasive species regulations more difficult, since vessels may not be operating at optimal performance. 

A proactive approach, driven by data collection, predictive analytics, and continuous monitoring, allows for earlier detection, more targeted interventions, and better alignment with operational goals. It also makes the case for investing in preventive technologies more compelling. The long-term payoff is smoother performance, fewer surprises, and clearer visibility into the condition of critical infrastructure. 

The industry is heading in that direction. Across coatings, novel technologies, inspection tools, and regulatory systems, the pieces are falling into place. The challenge now is integration. Operators need to take the technologies they are testing and turn them into part of how vessels are managed day to day. 

That shift from reactive response to proactive management is what will define the next phase of maritime decarbonization. It is not about adopting every new technology at once. It is about taking steps that make sense today and building the capability to adjust as conditions evolve. 

This spring made one thing clear. The knowledge and tools exist. The motivation is growing. What is needed now is alignment between strategy, technology, and execution. Taking it from research to the real world.